Cementitious patch compositions and methods

ABSTRACT

A cementitious hydrating patch composition is provided with improved strength and abrasion resistance. The patch comprises Portland cement in the amount from 2% to 10%, Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate in the amount from 2% to 30%, Gypsum in the amount from 0% to 15%, Calcium Aluminate Cement in the amount from 15% to 40%, Calcium Carbonate in the amount from 0% to 40%, at least one filler in the amount from 1% to 30%; and at least one binder in the amount from 10% to 40%, wherein all amounts are based on dry weight of the composition. Methods of preparing and using the patch composition are provided as well.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to cementitious compositions for patching walls,flooring and ceiling, and methods of using these patch compositions.

BACKGROUND

A patching formulation can be used for patching of plywood or concreteflooring, walls, ceilings, block materials and concrete plank.Cementitious patching materials are used for a broad spectrum ofapplications. The state of the art technology in this type of patches isCalcium Alumina Cement (CAC), sometimes referred to as High AluminaCement formulations (HAC).

Formulations described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,833,186 provide an abrasionresistant coating composition comprising alumina and silica. DE 2129058discloses mortar mixtures based on cement, sand additives for plasteringfloors. U.S. Pat. No. 4,735,027 provides coating formulations withsilica sand, cement and a particulate, non-fibrous filler.

Various parameters must be considered in choosing a patch formulation.Preferably, a patch formulation should adhere well to a surface overwhich it is applied. It is also important that after the patch sets, itshould be easy to sand the patch surface and prepare it for receiving acoat of paint.

Many patch formulations currently available on the market harden byevaporating water. This may lead to cracking, loose fit and eventualdislodging of the patch from surface to which it is adhered.

There is a need for patching materials which are easier to trowel, havehigher extensions in addition to being high-strength and self-drying.There is also a need for improvement of re-workability of patch productsand longer pot life; so that patching materials can be applied with lesswaste and larger volumes can be made for deeper applications and/orlarger areas.

SUMMARY

This and other needs are at least partially addressed by hydrating patchcompositions provided by this invention. Some embodiments include ahydrating patch composition comprising: Portland cement in the amountfrom 2% to 10%, Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate in the amount from 2% to30%, Gypsum in the amount from 0% to 15%, Calcium Aluminate Cement inthe amount from 15% to 40%, Calcium Carbonate in the amount from 0% to40%, at least one filler in the amount from 1% to 30%; and at least onebinder in the amount from 10% to 40%, wherein all amounts are based ondry weight of the composition. At least in some of the embodiments,calcium sulfate hemihydrate is calcined synthetic gypsum spray-coatedwith diethylene-triamine-pentaacetic acid (DTPA). Various fillers can beused a present hydrating patch composition. At least in someembodiments, the filler is includes at least one from the followinglist: hollow borosilicate glass beads, a combination of borosilicateglass beads and lime, perlite, siloxane-coated perlite, a combination ofsand and siloxane-coated perlite, and a combination of hollowborosilicate glass beads and silica flour.

In some embodiments, a hydrating patch formulation is prepared withhollow borosilicate glass beads with a crush strength from 250 to 6,000psi and silica flour in the ratio between the hollow borosilicate glassbeads and the silica flour is from 1:1 to 3:1.

Further embodiments include a hydrating patch composition formulatedwith hollow borosilicate glass beads and lime used in the amount from0.0625% to 10% of the dry weight of hollow borosilicate glass beads.

Other embodiments include a hydrating patch formulation in which thefiller is at least one of the following: perlite, a combination ofperlite with aluminum oxide, and a combination of perlite, aluminumoxide and fibers. Various fibers can be used in these formulations,including polypropylene stealth fibers, acrylic fibers and cellulosicfibers.

Additional embodiments include a hydrating patch formulations in whichthe filler is siloxane-coated perlite used in the amount from 2% to 50%,based on the dry weight of the hydrating patch composition.

Further hydrating patch formulations include those formulated withhydroxyethyl methyl cellulose, magnesium aluminum silicate, diutan gumand any combination thereof. Additional embodiments provide hydratingpatch compositions comprising at least one abrasive agent in the amountfrom 0.05% to 60% and wherein the abrasive agent is selected from thegroup consisting of: aluminum oxide brown, aluminum oxide white, garnetdust, stardust, copper slag, silica flour and any combinations thereof.

Various binders can be used in a hydrating patch composition, including,but not limited to, a binder is selected from the group consisting ofpolyacrylates, polyacetates and polyvinyl-acetates.

Further embodiments provide a kit for making a hydrating patchformulation. This kit may comprise a powder mixture of calcium aluminatecement, DTPA-coated caclined synthetic gypsum, gypsum, class C cement,calcium carbonate. The kit may further include hollow borosilicate glassbeads and lime, and wherein the hollow borosilicate glass beads and limeare stored separately from the power mixture.

Methods for patching various surfaces are provided as well. Furtherembodiments also provide methods for controlling viscosity of ahydrating patch formulation. In these methods, at least the followingcompounds are mixed together: Portland cement in the amount from 2% to10%, Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate in the amount from 2% to 30%, Gypsum inthe amount from 0% to 15%, Calcium Aluminate Cement in the amount from15% to 40%, Calcium Carbonate in the amount from 0% to 40%, hollowborosilicate glass beads in the amount from 1% to 30%; and at least onebinder in the amount from 10% to 40%. The viscosity of the mixture isthen controlled by adding to the mixture lime in the amount from 0.0625%to 10% based on the dry weight of the mixture.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The invention provides cementitious hydrating patch compositions usefulfor patching walls, flooring and ceiling. These patch compositions canbe applied over various surfaces and are suitable to patching minorcracks as well as for repairing surfaces which are deeply damaged.

These patch compositions are especially useful for applying overconcrete, but can be used over wood floor or surface as well. Unlikeother patch formulations which set by evaporation, the inventive patchformulations set by hydration and consequently they do not shrink orshrink only minimally. As a result, the hydrating patch compositionsadhere better to the surface, create a tight pluge and do not easilydislodge.

In some embodiments, a high-strength hydrating patch formulationcomprises at least the following:

1. Portland Cement (2%-10%)

2. Calcium sulfate hemihydrate (2%-30%)

3. Gypsum (0-15%)

4. Calcium Aluminate Cement (15-40%)

5. Calcium Carbonate (0-40%)

6. At least one filler (1%-30%)

7. At least one binder and/or bond adhesion additive (10%-40%)

In further embodiments, a high-strength hydrating patch formulation mayfurther comprise at least one of the following:

8. At least one rheological modifier (0.05%-10%)

9. At least one abrasive agent (0.05%-60%)

10. At least one set retarder (0.05%-1%)

Further embodiments include high-strength hydrating patch compositionswhich further comprise at least one abrasive agent in the amount from0.05% to 60%. The amount of water for a high-strength hydrating patchcomposition ranges from 18 cc to 70 cc for every 100 parts of thecomposition. More preferred water demands range between 18 cc and 60 ccfor every 100 parts of the composition, with the most preferred rangebeing between 20 cc to 55 cc of water for every 100 parts of thecomposition.

Gypsum is a chemical reactant and/or contributing binder in thecomposition. Suitable gypsum sources include, but are not limited to,calcium sulfate anhydrous, natural anhydrite, natural gypsum(CaSO₄X2H₂O), calcium sulfate hemi-hydrate beta, synthetic gypsum,calcium sulfate hemi-hydrate alpha, continuous kettle stucco (calcinedgypsum) and FST NOGO CKS stucco (synthetic calcined gypsum spray-coatedwith diethylene-triamine-pentaacetic acid (DTPA)).

Other reactant/binders include, but are not limited to, the calciumalumina cement, portland cements, and ethylene vinyl acetate copolymers.Various other suitable binders include, but are not limited to,polyacrylates, polyacetates and polyvinyl-acetates.

Suitable fillers include, but are not limited to, hollow borosilicateglass beads, coated and uncoated perlite, siloxane-coated perlite,calcium carbonate, lime, silica flour and sand. Fillers tend to expandthe composition and can increase yield, but also pose a potentialproblem that has to be addressed: most of the fillers do not contributeto strength and therefore, they contribute to a softer surface anddecrease the bond of the patch to the substrate or surface to which thepatch is applied.

Suitable rheological modifiers include, but are not limited to, hydrousmagnesium aluminum silicate, polycarboxylate, lime, clay andstabilizers.

The hydrating patch formulations may further comprise at least oneabrasive agent. The abrasive agents include, but are not limited to,aluminum oxide (brown and white), garnet dust, stardust, copper slag andsilica flour and combinations thereof. Adding an abrasive agent to apatch formulation is helpful for creating a patch which can be easilysanded without blowing the patch off the substrate. Thus, a patch with asmooth surface can be obtained easily. However, an abrasive agent cancreate grit and therefore, such patch formulations may not be suitablefor some applications by a trowel due to scratching of the surface towhich this patch is to be applied.

One embodiment provides a CAC-based patching product which utilizessynthetic calcined gypsum coated with diethylene-triamine-pentaaceticacid (DTPA). Methods for obtaining synthetic calcined gypsum coated withDTPA and formulations were described in U.S. patent application Ser. No.14/514,961. The use of DTPA-coated synthetic calcined gypsum aids incontrolling rheology of a hydrating patch.

Table 1 below describes components of an embodiment for a high-strengthhydrating patch composition.

TABLE 1 ADDITIVES AND FUNCTIONS IN HIGH STRENGTH HYDRATING PATCHComponent Function Calcium Aluminate Cement - known CAC cement: reactioncatalyzed by as CAC, HAC or Fondu lithium carbonate, the CAC reacts withcement the Portland cement and gypsum. A balanced amount results a soldcast material with positive expansion which consumes large quantities ofwater during the reaction. Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST NOGOStrength development, reacts with CKS stucco) Portland and CAC, NOGOcontrols local hydration around calcium sulfate hemi- hydrate particles,reduces stiffening, longer lubricity around particles. Ground Gypsumsuch as but not Reacts with cement and CAC limited to Terra Alba ®Gypsum Class C cement - but not limited to Hydration and strengthdevelopment the same. Portland cements I, II, III, V, Class C Calciumcarbonate Used as filler and plays some role in a hydration reactionHydroxyethyl methyl cellulose It imparts well-balanced properties,(HEMC) including open time, adhesion and shear strength. WALOCEL ™ MT30000 PV also adds good workability and enhances water retention Hydrousmagnesium aluminum Provides gelling and rheological properties silicateused to thicken and stabilize aqueous systems Lithium carbonate, lithiumsulfate Used as set accelerator in CAC system. and/or lithium hydroxideCitric acid Set inhibitor, viscosity stabilizer Polycarboxylate - suchas but not Works in conjunction with rheology limited to MELFUX 6681,4930, modifiers/stabilizer, provides ease of 2651, 2641, 5581, ethacrylG, M, mixing, impacts vicat set, and Gilmore viscocrete materialsinitial an final set, strength rate gain Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) Helpsremoving air from the mixture, creating smoother surface, improvesstrength Stabilizer - Diutan gum, but not Keeps the mixtures evenlydistributed, limited to the same. provides for uniform reaction ofreactants Copolymer powder of vinyl acetate Copolymer powder of vinylacetate and and ethylene (Vinnapas ethylene and is dispersible in water4021T) Borosilicate glass beads (3M K-46 Glass Beads K46 have a densityof 0.46 g/cc beads) and an isostatic crush strength of 6000 psi

Embodiments provide hydrating patch compositions for floor patchingwhich are easy to mix, can be skim-coated or used for deeper patches,have moderate to high compressive strengths and can be sanded withinhours after they are set. These hydrating patch formulations are creamyand smooth on the trowel or tools used for application and bond well tothe substrate.

At least some of the present hydrating patch compositions consume all ofthe water during hydration and setting. This provides for a system inwhich items can be placed on patched floor sooner as the patch hardensfaster.

The present hydrating patch formulations have bonds and compressivestrength equal to or greater than that expected from materials usedcurrently. At the same time, the present hydrating patch formulationsdemonstrate unexpectedly higher yields. Table 2 below provides hydratingpatch compositions with synthetic calcined stucco coated with DTPA (NOGOFST CKS STUCCO).

TABLE 2 HIGH-STRENGTH HYDRATING CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION UTILIZINGNOGO FST CKS STUCCO Amount Amount Range/Preferred Formula A: Components(lbs) (%) Range (lbs) Calcium Aluminate 752 28.46 700-800/725-775 Cement(CAC or HAC) Calcium Sulfate Hemi- 260 9.84 100-450/225-325 hydrate (FSTNOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum 85 3.22  0-400/50-100 Class C cement 130 4.92 75-200/100-150 Calcium carbonate 600 22.71  0-1000/400-800 Hydroxyethylmethyl 4 0.15 0-12/2-6  cellulose (HEMC) (Walocel) Hydrous magnesium 80.30 0-12/6-10 aluminum silicate (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate 40.15 1-8/2-6 Citric acid 0 0 0-5/0-3 Polycarboxylate Ether 4 0.150-12/2-8  (Melflux 6681) Defoamer (Vinapor 3 0.11 1-9/2-4 9010F)Stabilizer premix (3 parts 2 0.08 0-8/1-4 HYDROCAL C- Base Gypsum Cementand 1 part Duitan Gum by weight) Ethylene Vinyl Acetate 330 12.49 0-800/100-700 co-polymer (Vinnapas 4021T) Hollow Borosilicate 460 17.41100-750 Glass beads (K- 46 beads) TOTAL 2642 99.99 4108

As can be appreciated from Table 2, some embodiments include the use ofhollow borosilicate glass beads as a filler either in place of ortogether with sand and/or silica flour. The borosilicate glass beadslighten the weight of the resultant patching product and at the sametime provide slip to the patch on the trowel when applied. The glassbeads provide for a smoother, creamier less gritty, easy to trowel patchformulation.

It will be appreciated from Table 2B below that the present hydratingpatch composition (Formula A as defined in Table 2) has a bettercompressive strength in comparison to a current patch technology. Thefollowing two control formulations are used for comparative analysis.

TABLE 2A COMPARATIVE CONTROL FORMULATIONS Control 1 Control 2 ComponentsRange (%) Range (%) Calcium Aluminate 30-60 10-30 Cement (CAC or HAC)Portland Cement 3-7  5-10 Calcium Sulfate  7-13 0 Vinyl AcetateCopolymer 10-30 0.5-10  Calcium carbonate 30-60 0 Cellulose 1-5 0Crystalline Silica 0.1-1   0 Quartz 0 40-55 Slag 0 10-30

As can be appreciated from Table 2B, a hydrating patch compositiondefined by formula A in Table 2 has an improved compressive strength incomparison to a control formulation defined in Table 2A as control 1.

TABLE 2B COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (50 cc mix design) 28 Day Low Tem- 7 DayLow 14 Day Low perature 28 Day 24 Hour Temperature Temperature OvenMoist Bench Oven @ 110 Oven @ 110 @ 110 Cure in Cubes deg F. deg F. degF. Baggie (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) Formula A 1550 3450 3433 30081475 Current 958 2792 2650 2375 900 Patch Technology (Control 1)Compressive 61.79 23.57 29.55 26.65 63.89 Strength % Higher

The compressive strength of the present hydrating patch composition ison the average over 61% higher in the moist cure testing and 23-27%higher when the composition is oven or bench cured.

Table 2C demonstrates improvement in yield and lower weight for thepresent hydrating patch compositions. Formula A and current controlpatch were prepared as 50 cc mixtures in water. The mixtures wereallowed to dry either at the room temperature, in an oven or inhumidified environment. Dry densities of all samples were measured andrecorded in Table 2C below.

TABLE 2C DRY DENSITIES AND EXTENDED YIELD 14 Day Low 28 Day Low WetDensity 24 Hour 7-8 Day Low Temperature Temperature 28 Day Original OutBench Temperature Oven @110 Oven @110 Moist Cure of Molds Cubes Oven@110 deg F. deg F. in Baggie (lbs/FT3) (lbs/FT3) deg (lbs/FT3) (lbs/FT3)(lbs/FT3) (lbs/FT3) Formula A 65.63 65.56 51.93 52.21 51.59 64.04Current 87.94 83.00 69.29 70.54 68.55 82.66 Patch Technology (Control 1)Yield 33.99% 26.66% 33.42% 35.10% 32.87% 29.07% Increase (%)

As can be appreciated from Table 2C, the yield improvement isconsistently over 25% under all conditions tested. The most accuratemeasure of the true extension is expected to be the original, out ofmolds extension. In this case, the yield improvement is almost 34% withhigh strength.

A hydrating patch composition of Formula A also provides an improvedyield and evaporation after it has been applied to a surface.Comparative data on evaporation for Formula A are presented in Table 2Dbelow.

TABLE 2D EVAPORATION PER CUBIC FOOT OF EXTENDED YIELD (evaporation ateach stage based on loss from original weight as measured informulations with 50% water) 28 Day Low Wet Density 7-8 Day Low 14 DayLow Temperature 28 Day Moist Original Out 24 Hour TemperatureTemperature Oven @110 Cure in of Molds Bench Cubes Oven @110 deg F. Oven@110 deg F. deg F. Baggie (#/ft3) (#/FT3) (#/FT3) (#/FT3) (#/FT3)(#/FT3) Formula A 65.63 65.56 51.93 52.21 51.59 64.04 Formula A n/a 0.0713.7 13.42 14.04 1.59 Evaporation (#) Current 87.94 83.00 69.29 70.5468.55 82.66 Patch Technology (Control 1) Current n/a 4.49 18.65 17.419.39 5.28 Patch Technology (Control 1) Evaporation (#/ft3) Evaporationn/a 4.42 4.95 3.98 5.35 3.69 Higher (#/ft3)

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch compositions with hollowborosilicate glass beads of various compressive strength and density.Suitable hollow borosilicate glass beads include hollow borosilicateglass beads with crush strength of at least 100 psi, at least 250 psi,at least 300 psi, at least 400 psi, at least 500 psi, at least 600 psi,at least 700 psi, at least 800 psi, at least 900 psi and at least 1,000psi. In some embodiments, suitable hollow borosilicate glass beads havea crush strength in the range from 250 psi to 3,000 psi. In furtherembodiments, suitable hollow borosilicate glass beads have a crushstrength in the range from 250 psi to 6,000 psi. Some suitable hollowborosilicate glass beads are listed in Table 3.

TABLE 3 HOLLOW BOROSILICATE GLASS BEAD DENSITY AND CRUSH STRENGTHSHollow Crush Percent Crush Borosilicate True Density Strength (90%Strength of K- Glass Beads (g/cc) survival, psi) 46 K-46 0.46 6,000 n/aK37 0.37 3,000  50% K15 0.15 300   5% K1 0.10 250 4.2%

Some embodiments include hydrating patch formulations listed in Table3A.

TABLE 3A HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATIONS WITH HOLLOWBOROSILICATE GLASS BEADS Borosilicate Glass Bead Type K-37 K-15 K-1Formula B Formula C Formula D Amount Amount Amount Component (#) (#) (#)Calcium Aluminate Cement 752 752 752 (CAC or HAC or Fondu) CalciumSulfate Hemi-Hydrate (FST 260 260 260 NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum (TerraAlba) 85 85 85 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 130 130 130 Calcium carbonate600 600 600 Hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose 4 4 4 (HEMC) (Walocel) Hydrousmagnesium aluminum 8 8 8 silicate (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate(Ultra Fine) 4 4 4 Citric acid 0 0 0 Polycarboxylate Ether 4 4 4(Melflux 6681) Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 3 3 3 Stabilizer premix (DiutanGum) 2 2 2 Ethylene Vinyl Acetate co-polymer 330 330 330 (Vinnapas4021T) Subtotal all additives except Glass 2182 2182 2182 Beads HollowBorosilicate Glass Beads 400 165 152 TOTAL 2582 2347 2334

The bead changes in formulations of Table 3A were made by volumereplacement rather than by weight. Hollow borosilicate glass beads canbe used in various amounts. In some embodiments, the hollow borosilicateglass beads are used in the amount from about 5% to about 50%. In otherembodiments, the hollow borosilicate glass beads are used in the amountfrom about 5% to about 40%. In some embodiments, the hollow borosilicateglass beads are used in the amount from about 5% to about 30%. In someembodiments, the hollow borosilicate glass beads are used in the amountfrom about 5% to about 20%. In some embodiments, the hollow borosilicateglass beads are used in the amount from about 5% to about 10%.

As can be appreciated from Table 3B below, formulations with hollowborosilicate glass beads listed in Table 3A can be formulated into ahydrating patch composition with high compressive strength.

TABLE 3B COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF FORMULATIONS WITH HOLLOW BOROSILICATEGLASS BEADS 28 Day Low 28 Day 24 Hour Temperature Moist Bench Oven @ 110Cure in Cubes deg F. Baggie (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) Formula A 1550 3008 1475Current 958 2375 900 Patch Technology (Control 1) Formula B 1233 29171392 Formula C 1242 2575 1167 Formula D 1233 2317 1050

Hollow borosilicate glass beads may rapidly increase the viscosity of ahydrating patch formulation, which is not desirable because it leads tothickening of the formulation prior to its application, and some of thethickened formulation may no longer be suitable for application or thedrying time for this formulation may lengthen.

Other embodiments include hydrating patch formulations to which limeand/or similar type of material has been added. Suitable lime includesIVORY LIME™ (autoclaved finish lime, CaMg(OH)₄ available from the UnitedStates Gypsum Company, Chicago, Ill.). In further embodiments, lime canbe used in combination with or instead of sodium hydroxide, magnesiumhydroxide and/or ammonium hydroxide as alternatives to lime.

Surprisingly, adding lime such as, but not limited to IVORY LIME™stabilizes the viscosity of the hydrating patch formulation and preventsit from thickening. Lime can be used in different amounts for thepurpose of stabilizing a hydrating patch formulation with hollowborosilicate glass beads. At least in some embodiments, lime is used inthe amount from 0.25% to 5% of the dry weight of borosilicate glassbeads. In other embodiments, lime can be used in the amount from 0.0625%to 10% of the dry weight of borosilicate glass beads. The most preferredamount for lime is 0.125% to 5% of the dry weight of borosilicate glassbeads.

Further embodiments provide a method where a present hydrating patchformulation is premixed and can be stored on a shelf for a period oftime prior to its use. At least in some of these embodiments, a premixfor high-strength hydrating patch formulation can be prepared as shownin Table 4 below.

TABLE 4 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH COMPOSITION Amount AmountFormula E: Components (#) (%) Calcium Aluminate 1320 32.19 Cement (CACor HAC) Calcium Sulfate Hemi- 460 11.22 hydrate (FST NOGO CKS Stucco)Gypsum 150 3.66 Class C cement 230 5.61 Calcium carbonate 1050 25.60Hydroxyethyl methyl 7 0.17 cellulose (HEMC) Hydrous magnesium 14 0.34aluminum silicate Lithium carbonate 7 0.17 Citric acid 1 0.02Polycarboxylate Ether 3.5 0.09 (Melflux 6681) Vinapor 9010F 5 0.12(defoamer) Stabilizer premix (3 parts 3.5 0.09 HYDROCAL C- Base GypsumCement and 1 part Duitan Gum by weight) Ethylene Vinyl Acetate 750 18.29co-polymer (Vinnapas 4021T) Aluminum Oxide (white) 100 2.44 Glass beads(K-37 0 0 beads) TOTAL 4101.50 100.01

The premix can be then further mixed with hollow borosilicate glassbeads and lime prior to use. As shown in Table 4A below, furtherembodiments include a hydrating patch formulation of Table 4 to whichborosilicate glass beads and lime are added. As further reported inTable 4A, adding lime stabilizes the viscosity of a hydrating patchformulation with hollow borosilicate glass beads.

TABLE 4A THE USE OF HIGH STRENGTH HYDRATING PATCH PREMIX WITH HOLLOWBOROSILICATE GLASS BEADS Brabender Viscosity in Brabender Units (BU)Note: the Batch = Hollow Lime Gilmore lower the 900 lbs Glass Added SetTime number the of Premix Beads per Initial/ less FORMULA per BatchBatch Final viscous the E (lbs) (lbs) (min) mix Comment Batch 100 033/76 160 Thin Control Creamy Batch 1 100 0 33/69 830 Thick Pasty Batch2 100 0.25 29/55 740 Thick Pasty Batch 3 100 1.25 25/55 500 Creamy Batch4 100 1.75 25/52 350 Thin Creamy Batch 5 100 2.5 24/51 240 Thin Creamy

In TABLE 4A, the Brabender test is run to determine the viscosity of ahydrating patch formulation. The lower the number, the lower is theviscosity. A small cylindrical container is filled to the top with themix and then put in place on the Brabender apparatus. A spindle on ahead is lowered into the slurry and then the machine is turned on. Thespindle rotates and a measurement of the resistance of the spindleturning is made in what is referred to as brabender units. As shown inTable 4A, the more lime is added to the hydrating patch formulation, thelower the viscosity of the formulation is.

Unexpectedly, lime not only improves the rheology control of a hydratingpatch composition, set control and drying rate, but surprising lime alsoimproves the surface hardness and the flexural strength of the hydratingpatch formula. TABLE 4B reports the unforeseen impact of lime on ahydrating patch composition with respect to surface hardness andflexural strength improvement.

TABLE 4B THE USE OF HIGH STRENGTH PATCH PREMIX WITH BEADS MonotronSurface Dry Hardness: Ivory Density (Kg Lime (lbs/ft3) load for Increasein Hollow Added (note: top to 0.1″ Hardness vs. MOR Increase Glass perbottom only penetration Formula Flexural vs. Formula Batch = 900 lbsBeads per Batch 10% variation in of 10 mm E/Batch 1 with Strength MORE/Batch 1 with of Premix Batch (lbs) (lbs) density) ball) NO LIME (%)(PSI) NO LIME (%) Batch 100 0 59.8 19.25 n/a 746 n/a Control Batch 1 1000 61.6 20.75 n/a 781 n/a Batch 2 100 0.25 65.7 26.50 27.70 1079 38.16Batch 3 100 1.25 65.8 32.50 56.63 1249 59.92 Batch 4 100 1.75 66.6 35.5071.08 1443 84.76 Batch 5 100 2.5 65.8 37 78.00 1569 100.25

As can be seen from Table 4B, the surface hardness and the flexuralstrength are improved when lime is added to a hydrating patchformulation. These improvements are observed when lime is used in therange from 0.0625% to 10% of the dry weight of borosilicate glass beads.The percentage of improvement over the range is as high as 78%improvement in surface hardness and over 100% improvement in FlexuralStrength (MOR). Based on the data obtained, it is believed that thepreferred range for lime is 0.125% to 5% of the dry weight of hollowborosilicate glass beads.

This improvement in surface hardness and flexural strength provides asignificant advantage to the present hydrating patch formulation if usedfor repairing a floor which is constantly exposed to abrasion and loads.

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations withrheological modifiers omitted.

TABLE 5 HIGH-STRENGTH HYDRATING CEMENTITIOUS PATCH PREMIX WITH 3RHEOLOGY MODIFIERS OMITTED Amount Amount Formula F: Components (LBS) (%)Calcium Aluminate Cement 1320 28.46 (CAC or HAC) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-460 9.84 hydrate (FST NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum 150 3.22 Class C cement230 4.92 Calcium carbonate 1050 22.71 Walocel (hydroxyethyl 0 0 methylcellulose (HEMC) Mini-U Gel FG 0 0 (hydrous magnesium aluminum silicate)Lithium carbonate 7 0.15 Citric acid 1 0 Polycarboxylate Ether 3.5 0.15(Melflux 6681) Vinapor 9010F (defoamer) 5 0.11 Stabilizer premix 0 0.00Ethylene Vinyl Acetate co- 450 12.49 polymer (Vinnapas 4021T) Glassbeads (K-37 beads) 0 0 TOTAL 3976.5 99.99

Further embodiments include hydrating patch formulations comprisingCalcium Aluminate Cement, FST NOGO CKS Stucco, Gypsum, Class C cement,calcium carbonate, lithium carbonate, citric acid, polycarboxylate, atleast one defoamer, ethylene-vinyl acetate co-polymer and hollowborosilicate glass beads. These compositions can be formulated with orwithout at least one rheological modifier. Surprisingly, omittingrheological modifiers results in a patch with stronger surface andstronger bond of the patch to the surface. Table 5A below reports bondstrength results for formulations prepared with or without hydroxyethylmethyl cellulose, magnesium aluminum silicate or a stabilized premix.

TABLE 5A SURFACE CHEMISTRY DIFFERENCES FOR HIGH STRENGTH PATCHFORMULATIONS WITH HOLLOW BOROSILICATE GLASS BEADS DEPENDENT ON THE USEOF A RHEOLOGICAL MODIFIER BYK Gardner Abrasion after Bond Brabender 100cycles Strength Viscosity in with ACE 80 Bond Pull Brabender medium gritHollow on Units (BU) paper after 24 hrs Batch = 900 # of Glass K37Stabilizer Plywood Note: the lower the (grams Premix Beads per WalocelMinugel Premix (PSI) number the less loss to FORMULA F Batch (#)(#/Batch) (#/Batch) (#/Batch) 48 hours viscous the mix surface) Batch100 1.5 3 0.75 70 900 1.82 Control Batch 1 100 1.5 3 0 37.50 1000+ 0.55Batch 2 100 1.5 0 0.75 60.50 900 0.55 Batch 3 100 0 3 0.75 73 720 0.94Batch 4 100 0 0 0 140  90 0.18

It can be appreciated from Table 5A and other data provided in thisdisclosure that removing all three rheological modifiers may nearlydouble the bond strength of a hydrating patch formulation. The abrasionresults also indicate that the hydrating patch has developed a toughersurface without the three modifiers. Accordingly, further embodimentsprovide hydrating patch formulations in which the use of a rheologicalmodifier is adjusted such that either no rheological modifier is used oronly one rheological modifier is used.

Further embodiments provide a method in which bond strength andabrasiveness of a hydrating patch are controlled by omitting at leastone rheological modifier and/or by altering the amount of the modifierused. At least in some embodiments, only hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose(HEMC) is used in a hydrating patch formulation which is preparedwithout magnesium aluminum silicate or a stabilizer premix (3 partsHYDROCAL C-Base Gypsum Cement and 1 part Duitan Gum by weight).

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations with a longshelf life and methods of making same. These hydrating patchformulations are prepared as a mixture comprising of Calcium AluminateCement, FST NOGO CKS Stucco or some other stucco, gypsum, class Ccement, calcium carbonate, lithium carbonate, citric acid, defoamer anda polymeric binder. Hollow borosilicate glass beads, water andrheological modifiers are then added right before the hydrating patchformulation is to be used. Storing a hydrating patch formulationseparately from the light-weight filler prevents loss of materialsthrough the system and stratification of the formulation while on theself.

According to further embodiments, a hydrating patch formulation can beformulated such that to obtain a patch with a softer surface. Whilethere may be applications where this is desirable, in other applicationsthe surface hardness is a key to providing a solid patch with which tobond adhesives and/or materials which may be poured upon it. In somecases, the patch may be a serviceable area and has to have high hardnessto resist wear. While it is generally accepted that adding alight-weight filler may decrease hardness of a resulting patch, thisinvention provides embodiments in which a light weight filler such ashollow borosilicate glass beads are used, yet the resulting hydratingpatch can be sanded and it has a sufficiently hard surface. Furtherembodiments provide hydrating patch formulations with differentpolymeric binders. Some of these formulations are listed in Table 7below.

TABLE 7 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION WITH ALTERNATEPOLYMERS Polymer Type But Not Limited to the Same Vinnapas VinnapasVinnapas 5111L 5025L 5012 Formula H Formula I Formula J Amount AmountAmount Component (#) (#) (#) Calcium Aluminate Cement (CAC or 600 600600 HAC or Fondu) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST 230 230 230 NOGO CKSStucco) Gypsum (Terra Alba) 85 85 85 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 175 175175 Calcium carbonate 680 680 680 Walocel MK 30000PF 4 4 4 (hydroxyethylmethyl cellulose (HEMC) hydrous magnesium aluminum 8 8 8 silicate(Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate (Ultra Fine) 4 4 4 Citric acid 0 0 0Polycarboxylate Ether 2 2 2 (Melflux 6681) Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 3 33 Stabilizer premix (Diutan Gum) 2 2 2 Ethylene Vinyl Acetate co-polymer330 330 330 Polymer Type But Not Limited to the Same Glass Beads 400 400400 TOTAL 2523 2523 2523

As shown in Table 7A below, compressive strength of hydrating patchformulations prepared with different polymers is significantly improvedover a control patch formulation.

TABLE 7A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF HYDRATING PATCH FORMULATIONS PREPAREDWITH DIFFERENT POLYMERS 28 Day Low 24 Hour Bench Temperature 28 DayMoist Cubes Oven @110 deg F. Cure in Baggie (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) Formula B1233 2917 1392 Current 958 2375 900 Patch Technology (Control 1) FormulaH 1642 4100 1575 Formula I 1608 4083 1550 Formula J 1408 3575 1450

The present hydrating patch formulations also demonstrate greaterabrasion resistance and reduced viscosity. As can be appreciated fromTable 7B below, the present hydrating patch formulations are resistantto abrasion.

TABLE 7B HIGH STRENGTH PATCH FORMULATIONS DEMONSTRATE GREATER ABRASIONRESISTENCE AND REDUCED VISCOSITY BYK Gardner Abrasion after Brabender100 cycles Viscosity in with ACE 80 Note: all mixes Brabender mediumgrit at 2 parts Units (BU) paper after 24 hrs patch: 1 Gilmore SetsNote: the lower the (grams part water by (Initial/Final) number the lessloss from weight (min) viscous the mix surface) Current 36/66 7801.43-1.78 Patch Technology (Control 1) Formula H 20/66 180 1.0

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations to whichabrasive agents have been added. Suitable abrasive agents include, butare not limited to, aluminum oxide (brown and white), garnet dust,stardust, copper slag and silica flour and combinations thereof. As canbe appreciated from Table 8 below, a hydrating patch formulation can beprepared with various abrasive agents.

TABLE 8 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION WITH ALTERNATIVEABRASIVE AGENTS Alumi- num Oxide (White) Garnet Stardust Formu- FormulaK Formula L la M Amount Amount Amount Component (#) (#) (#) CalciumAluminate Cement (CAC or 752 752 752 HAC or Fondu) Calcium SulfateHemi-hydrate (FST 260 260 260 NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum (Terra Alba) 85 8585 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 130 130 130 Calcium carbonate 600 600 600Walocel MK 30000PF 4 4 4 (hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose (HEMC) hydrousmagnesium aluminum silicate 8 8 8 (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate(Ultra Fine) 4 4 4 Citric acid 0 0 0 Polycarboxylate Ether 2 2 2(Melflux 6681) Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 3 3 3 Stabilizer premix (DiutanGum) 2 2 2 Ethylene Vinyl Acetate co-polymer 430 430 430 Vinnapas 4021THollow Borosilicate Glass Beads (K37) 200 200 200 Abrasion ResistantMaterial 200 200 200 TOTAL 2678 2678 2678

TABLE 8A HYDRATING PATCH UTILIZING ALTERNATE ABRASIVE AGENTS ISRESISTANT TO ABRASION Note: all mixes at 2 parts patch: BYK GardnerAbrasion after 100 cycles with 1 part water ACE 80 medium grit paperafter 24 hrs by weight (grams loss from surface) Current 1.43-1.78 PatchTechnology (Control 1) Formula H 1.0 Formula K 0.84 Formula L 0.84Formula M 0.64

While some embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations with hollowborosilicate glass beads, other embodiments contemplate the use of otherfillers. In some embodiments, perlite is used as a filler. Either coatedor uncoated perlite is suitable. Perlite can be used in various amounts.At least in some embodiments, perlite can be used in the amount from 2%to 50%, based on the dry weight of the formulation.

Still further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations in whicha filler comprises a combination of perlite and aluminum oxide. In theseembodiments, perlite and aluminum oxide can be used in the 50:50 ratio.

Still further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations in whicha filler comprises a combination of perlite, aluminum oxide and fibers.Various fibers are suitable for this application and includepolypropylene stealth fibers, acrylic fibers and cellulosic fibers. Atleast in some embodiments, the combination filler comprises perlite,aluminum oxide and ⅛″ polypropylene stealth fibers. The amount of fibersmay vary. At least in some embodiments, the useful range for fibers isfrom 0.1 to 2% by weight of total batch. At least in some embodiments,the preferred range for fibers is from 0.25-1%.

Embodiments for hydrating patch formulations comprising perlite, acombination of perlite with aluminum oxide and a combination of perlitewith aluminum oxide and polypropylene stealth fibers include thoselisted in Table 9 below.

TABLE 9 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION WITH ALTERNATEABRASION RESISTANT ADDITIVES Perlite Perlite Aluminum Perlite AluminumOxide Formula Oxide Fiber N Formula O Formula P Amount Amount AmountComponent (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) Calcium Aluminate Cement (CAC or 1320 752752 HAC or Fondu) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST 460 260 260 NOGO CKSStucco) Gypsum (Terra Alba) 150 85 85 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 300130 130 Calcium carbonate 1050 600 600 Walocel MK 30000PF 7 4 4(hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose (HEMC) hydrous magnesium aluminumsilicate 14 8 8 (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate (Ultra Fine) 7 4 4Citric acid 0 0 0 Polycarboxylate Ether 3.5 2 2 (Melflux 6681) Defoamer(Vinapor 9010F) 5 3 3 Stabilizer premix (Diutan Gum) 3.5 2 2 EthyleneVinyl Acetate co-polymer 750 430 430 Vinnapas 4021T Perlite (35/34Siloxane treated perlite) 200 200 200 Aluminum Oxide (White) 0 200 200Fibers (⅛″ polypropylene stealth 0 0 20 fibers) but not limited to thesame, fibers such as cellulose and acrylic are suitable as well) TOTAL4270 4470 4490

As can be appreciated from Table 9A below, a hydrating patch formulationwith perlite as a filler has an improved bond strength in comparison toa control formulation. This result is unexpected because it is generallybelieved that adding a filler decreases the strength of a resultingpatch formulation. As can be also appreciated from Table 9A, combiningperlite with aluminum oxide improves further the bonding strength andabrasion resistance. Further improvements in abrasion resistance areachieved if a filler is a combination of perlite with aluminum oxide andpolypropylene stealth fibers.

TABLE 9A COMPARATIVE ABRASION AND BOND PULL STRENGTH OF HYDRATING PATCHWITH PERLITE BYK Gardner Abrasion after 100 Bond Bond Bond Note: allcycles with ACE Pull on Pull on Pull on mixes at 2 80 medium gritPlywood Plywood Plywood parts patch: paper after 24 hrs (PSI) (PSI)(PSI) 1 part water (grams loss 24 hours 48 hours 72 hours by weight fromsurface) Average Average Average Current Patch 1.43-1.78 140 125 133Technology (Control 1) Formula N 2.00 153 179.5 171.5 Formula O 1.00 142142.5 177.5 Formula P 0.93

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations with coatedperlite. At least in some embodiments, a hydrating patch is formulatedwith perlite which is pretreated with siloxane. The amount of thesiloxane-coated perlite to be used in a formulation may vary and dependson the application. In general from 5% to 20% of siloxane-coated perlitecan be used. Formulations with higher amounts of siloxane-coated perliteare suitable for patching walls and ceilings, while formulations withlower amounts of siloxane-coated perlite are particularly suitable forpatching floor and other surfaces with heavy traffic. Some of suchhydrating patch formulations are listed in Table 10 below. Thesehydrating patch formulations show excellent shrinkage compensationcontrol.

TABLE 10 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION WITH PERLITE 35/34Siloxane Perlite Type But Not Limited to the Same Perlite PerlitePerlite Formula Formula Formula Q R S Amount Amount Amount Component (#)(#) (#) Calcium Aluminate Cement (CAC or 1222 1222 1222 HAC or Fondu)Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST 400 400 400 NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum(Terra Alba) 200 200 200 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 200 200 200 Calciumcarbonate 950 950 950 Walocel MK 30000PF 6 6 6 (hydroxyethyl methylcellulose (HEMC) hydrous magnesium aluminum silicate 12 12 12 (Mini-UGel FG) Lithium carbonate (Ultra Fine) 5 5 5 Citric acid 1.5 1.5 1.5Polycarboxylate Ether 0 0 0 (Melflux 6681) Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 5 55 Stabilizer (Starvis 3003f) but not 4.25 4.25 4.25 limited to the sameEthylene Vinyl Acetate co-polymer 550 550 550 Vinnapas 4021T Shrinkagereducing agent 50 50 50 Prevent C: (mineral oxide/glycol blend) Perlite(35/34 Siloxane treated perlite) 640 400 200 TOTAL 4445.75 4205.754005.75

As can be appreciated from Table 10A below, a hydrating patch formulatedwith siloxane-coated perlite has an improved compressive strength incomparison to a current patch technology used as a control.

TABLE 10A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF HYDRATING PATCH FORMULATED WITHSILOXANE-COATED PERLITE Note: all mixes at 2 1 Hour 3 Hour 7-8 Day Low28 Day Moist parts patch: Bench Bench Temperature Cure in 1 part waterCubes Cubes Oven @110 Baggie by weight (PSI) (PSI) deg F. (PSI) (PSI)Current Patch 538 775 2792 900 Technology (Control 1) Formula Q 367 5331742 825 Formula R 475 583 2075 875 Formula S 742 808 3117 1250

Additional advantages of hydrating patch formulations prepared withsiloxane-coated perlite include the ease with which this formulation canbe mixed. These formulations can also provide a high positive expansionand a significantly decreased viscosity. As can be appreciated fromTable 10B below, hydrating patch formulations with siloxane-coatedperlite have a much lower viscosity in comparison to a control patch.These formulations also expand more, which allows to save on materialsand produce a larger amount of a patch formulation.

TABLE 10B PERLITE FORMULATIONS DEMONSTRATE EASE OF MIXING AND HIGHERPOSITIVE EXPANSION Note: all Brabender Viscosity in mixes at 2 BrabenderUnits (BU) Linear Expansion parts patch: Note: the lower the orShrinkage 1 part water number the less (+/−) by weight viscous the mixPercent Current Patch 780 +0.018 Technology (Control 1) Formula R 260+0.336 Formula S 240 +0.336

Additional advantages provided by a hydrating patch formulation withsiloxane-coated perlite include an increase in yield. As can beappreciated from Table 100 below, such formulations increase the yieldby at least 10% or higher, depending on the amount of siloxane-coatedperlite used in the formulations.

TABLE 10C PERLITE FORMULATIONS DEMONSTRATE AN INCREASED YIELD Note: allmixes at 2 parts patch: Wet Density Original 1 part water Out of Moldsby weight (lbs/ft3) Formula R 67.24 Current Patch Technology 87.94 YieldIncrease (%) 30.78 Formula S 79.73 Current Patch Technology 87.94 YieldIncrease (%) 10.29

As can be appreciated by comparing table 10B with table 10C, the yieldincrease is also accompanied by the medium to high strength. This resultis unexpected because the increase in yield usually leads to lowerdensity and decreased strength.

Additional embodiments include hydrating patch formulations which use asfiller a combination of hollow borosilicate glass beads and silicaflour. These formulations can be prepared with hollow borosilicate glassbeads of various compressive strength, including those with compressivestrength from 250 psi to 6,000 psi. Silica flour with particles ofdifferent size can be used, including silica flour which can be passedthrough −200 mesh or −325 mesh. In some of these formulations, hollowborosilicate glass beads can be used in the amount from 5% to 50%, basedon the dry weight of the formulation. The silica flour can be used inthe amounts from 5% to 25%, based on the dry weight of the hydratingpatch formulation.

At least in some formulations, the ratio between hollow borosilicateglass beads and silica flour is 1:1. In other formulations, the ratiobetween glass beads and silica flour is 2:1. In further formulations,the ratio is 3:1. Some of the hydrating patch formulations with acombination of hollow borosilicate glass beads and silica flour arelisted in Table 11 below.

TABLE 11 HYDRATING PATCH FORMULATIONS WITH HOLLOW BOROSILICATE GLASSBEADS AND SILICA FLOUR IN COMBINATION Silica Silica Silica Fume −325Fume −325 Fume −200 mesh mesh mesh Formula Formula Formula T U V AmountAmount Amount Component (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) Calcium Aluminate Cement 752752 752 (CAC or HAC or Fondu) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate 260 260 260(FST NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum (Terra Alba) 85 85 85 Portland Cement(Class “C”) 130 130 130 Calcium carbonate 600 600 600 Walocel(hydroxyethyl 4 4 4 methyl cellulose (HEMC) hydrous magnesium 8 8 8aluminum silicate (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate (Ultra 4 4 4 Fine)Citric acid 0 0 0 Polycarboxylate Ether 4 4 4 (Melflux 6681) Defoamer(Vinapor 9010F) 3 3 3 Stabilizer premix (Diutan 2 2 2 Gum) EthyleneVinyl Acetate 330 330 330 co-polymer (Vinnapas 4021T) Subtotal alladditives 2182 2182 2182 except Beads Glass Beads 400 400 400 MeshSilica Flour 200 100 200 TOTAL 2782 2682 2782

A filler prepared from a combination of hollow borosilicate glass beadsand silicate flour increases compressive strength of a hydrating patchcomposition. This can be further appreciated from Tables 11A and 11Bbelow, in which different combinations of hollow borosilicate glassbeads with silicate flour are compared to a control formulation.

TABLE 11A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF HYDRATING PATCH FORMULATION UTILIZINGSILICA FLOUR IN CONJUNCTION WITH HOLLOW BOROSILICATE GLASS BEADS 8 Day14 Day 28 Day 24 Low Tem- Low Tem- Low Tem- 28 Day Hour peratureperature perature Moist Bench Oven @110 Oven @110 Oven @110 Cure inCubes deg F. deg F. deg F. Baggie (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) Current958 — — 2375 900 Patch Technol- ogy (Con- trol 1) Formula T 1317 30083450 2900 1433 Formula U 1392 2967 2892 3150 1525 Formula V 1317 28332858 2875 1275

Despite being formulated as a low density composition with high yield, ahydrating patch formulation which comprises a composition ofborosilicate glass beads and silica flour is also abrasion resistant,which makes this formulation well suited for patching areas with hightraffic and loads, such as for example as flooring. As can beappreciated from Table 11B, these formulations perform well in theabrasion-resistance test as well as in the expansion test.

TABLE 11B HYDRATING PATCH MATERIALS WITH SILICA FLOUR AND HOLLOWBOROSILICATE GLASS BEADS Formula T Formula U Formula V NormalConsistency: 60 60 58 (cc) Patty Size: (in) 3.72 3.75 3.88 TestConsistency: (cc) 50 50 50 BYK Gardner Abrasion 1.08 1.21 1.17 after 100cycles with BYK 80 grit paper after 24 hrs (grams loss from surface) WetDensity: (#/ft3) 70.59 70.31 70.18 Dry Density: (#/ft3) 56 56 55(nearest 1.0#/ft3) Maximum Expansion: +0.229 +0.254 +0.053 (%) VicatSet: (min) 22 20 23

Even more unexpectedly, a hydrating patch formulation shows a positiveexpansion at very low dry densities of 55-56 lbs/ft3. The low densityhydrating patch formulation demonstrates a 24-25% increase in the yield.Interestingly, a 50% loading level of a −325 mesh material providesequal to or greater abrasion resistance compared to the −200 mesh silicaflour.

Typically, cementitious patch products known in the art have a short potlife which limits the size of the mix which can be used at a time. Oncethe setting action begins they cannot be rejuvenated, except in somecases by the addition of more water.

The present hydrating patch formulations incorporate a uniquecombination of rheology modifiers which allow for the re-working orre-tempering of the composition up to 3-4 times and which continues tobe useful beyond the otherwise earlier stiffening. This makes theproduct easier to use, provides for less waste and larger batches can bepre-mixed. These formulations therefore, save time and resources.

Further embodiments include hydrating patch formulations with aplasticizer such as, but not limited to, polycarboxylate ethers whichare used in conjunction with other rheology modifiers and provide forunexpectedly unique re-tempering under shear energy as compared tomaterials commonly used for this purpose. In these embodiments, citricacid or cream of tart can be used in combination with a polycarboxylateether. As can be appreciated from Table 12, these formulations can bereworked several times.

TABLE 12 HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION COMPARING CITRICACID USAGE VS. CREAM OF TARTAR IN A FORMULA WHICH CAN BE REWORKED 3-4TIMES AFTER INITIAL MIX Citric Cream of Cream of Acid Tartar TartarFormula Formula Formula W X Y Amount Amount Amount Component (#) (#) (#)Calcium Aluminate Cement (CAC or 600 600 600 HAC or Fondu) CalciumSulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST 230 230 230 NOGO CKS Stucco) Gypsum (TerraAlba) 85 85 85 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 175 175 175 Calcium carbonate680 680 680 Walocel 4 4 4 (hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose (HEMC) hydrousmagnesium aluminum silicate 8 8 8 (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate(Ultra Fine) 4 4 4 Citric acid 1.75 0 0 Cream of Tartar (potassiumbitartrate) 0 0.60 1.75 Polycarboxylate Ether (Melflux 6681) 2 2 2Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 3 3 3 Stabilizer premix (Diutan Gum) 2 2 2Ethylene Vinyl Acetate co-polymer 330 330 330 (Vinnapas 4021T) Hollowborosilicate glass beads (K37) 350 350 350 Aluminum Oxide 55 55 55 IvoryLime 4.5 4.5 4.5 TOTAL 2533.25 2532.75 2532.5

As can be further appreciated from Table 12A, hydrating patchformulations have a longer pot life and can be reworked several times.

TABLE 12A COMPARING CITRIC ACID USAGE VS. CREAM OF TARTAR IN A HYDRATINGPATCH FORMULA WHICH CAN BE REWORKED 3-4 TIMES AFTER INITIAL MIX(BRABENDER VISCOSITY COMPARISON RETEMPERED VS. UNRETEMPERED) BrabenderViscostiy (BU) (The lower the BU, the thinner the mix) Current FORMULA WFORMULA X FORMULA Y Patch Citric Acid Cream of Tartar Cream of TartarTechnology 1.75 lbs/batch 1.75 lbs/batch 0.60 lbs/batch 1 part patch 1part patch to 0.55 1 part patch to 0.55 1 part patch to 0.55 to 0.55parts parts water by parts water by parts water by water by Brabenderweight weight weight weight Time (minutes) Untempered RetemperedUntempered Retempered Untempered Retempered Untempered 3 560 5 290 240200 6 320 240 240 8 300 250 280 10 210 300 160 240 190 280 12 290 220300 14 280 260 360 15 190 180 220 16 260 220 520 18 260 260 680 20 170250 200 320 440 1000+ 22 270 440 24 25 160 280 260 600 1000+ 26 360 98028 460 1000+ 30 230 600 540 1000+ 32 920 1000+ 34 35 350 1000+ 1000+ 3638 40 1000+

Further embodiments provide hydrating patch formulations to which atleast one set inhibitor is added. It was unexpectedly determined thatcombinations of lime/citric acid and/or lime/cream of tartar provide fora more optimal setting time, working time and strength and bonddevelopment. A lower viscosity for a hydrating patch formulation can bemaintained while retempering the mix 3-4 and even more times dependingon the level of citric acid or cream of tartar. This aspect is furtherdemonstrated in Table 12B below. As can be appreciated from Table 12B,the present hydrating patch formulations utilizing the citric acid/limeand cream of tartar/lime combination have higher bond strengths andcompressive strengths.

TABLE 12B HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION COMPARING CITRICACID USAGE VS. CREAM OF TARTAR IN A FORMULA WHICH CAN BE REWORKED 3-4TIMES AFTER INITIAL MIX (Vicat Set, Compressive Strengths and BondStrength Comparison) FORMULA W FORMULA X FORMULA X Current Patch CitricAcid Cream of Tartar Cream of Tartar Technology 1.75 lbs/batch 0.60lbs/batch 1.75 lbs/batch (Control 1) 1 parts 1 parts 1 parts 1 partspatch/0.55 part patch/0.55 part patch/0.55 part patch/0.50 part water byweight water by weight water by weight water by weight Vicat Set: (min)38-43 26-27 36 22-24 Compressive 4017 4254 3733 2375 Strengths: (PSI)(28 day 110 deg F. Oven) Bond Strengths: 127 100 92 84 (PSI) 24 hourBond Strengths: 119 104 97 92 (PSI) 48 hour

Further comparison of compressive strength at a ratio of 1 part highstrength patch to 0.60 parts water is provided in Table 12C below.

TABLE 12C HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH FORMULATION COMPARING CITRICACID USAGE VS. CREAM OF TARTAR IN A FORMULA WHICH CAN BE REWORKED 3-4TIMES AFTER INITIAL MIX (Evaluation of higher water on strength vs.current patch technology at lower water) FORMULA W FORMULA X FORMULA XCurrent Patch Citric Acid Cream of Tartar Cream of Tartar Technology1.75 lbs/batch 0.60 lbs/batch 1.75 lbs/batch (Control 1) 1 parts 1 parts1 parts 1 parts patch/0.60 part patch/0.60 part patch/0.60 partpatch/0.50 part water by weight water by weight water by weight water byweight Compressive 3061 3317 3425 2375 Strengths: (PSI) (28 day 110 degF. Oven)

Further embodiments provide hydrating path formulations specificallydesigned to be used as deep patches. Such deep patches include, but arenot limited to, patches of 4 inches and deeper. In these deep patchformulations, a combination of at least two fillers is used. Thesefillers are selected from the group consisting of perlite, coatedperlite, siloxane-coated perlite, sand, borosilicate glass beads andsilica flour. At least in some embodiments, the combination for thefiller is sand and siloxane-coated perlite. Suitable deep patchformulations include those listed in Table 13 below.

TABLE 13 HYDRATING PATCH FORMULATION FOR DEEP-FILL APPLICATIONS DeepFill Patch Formula Z Amount Component (lbs) Calcium Aluminate Cement(CAC or 752 HAC or Fondu) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate (FST 260 NOGO CKSStucco) Gypsum (Terra Alba) 85 Portland Cement (Class “C”) 130 Calciumcarbonate 600 Walocel MK 30000PF 4 (hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose (HEMC)Hydrous magnesium aluminum silicate 8 (Mini-U Gel FG) Lithium carbonate(Ultra Fine) 4 Citric acid 2.50 Polycarboxylate Ether 5 (Melflux 6681)Defoamer (Vinapor 9010F) 3 Defoamer (foamaster CN) 4 Ethylene VinylAcetate co-polymer 200 (Vinnapas 4021T) Treated Perlite (35/34 perlite)50 Sand (Oklahoma Sand) 1850 TOTAL 3957.50

Further properties of a deep fill formulation include those listed inTable 13A below.

TABLE 13A PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF DEEP FILL FORMULATION (CompressiveStrength at 20 cc mix design) 8 Day 14 Day 28 Day 24 Low Tem- Low Tem-Low Tem- 28 Day Hour perature perature perature Moist Bench Oven @110Oven @110 Oven @110 Cure in Cubes deg F. deg F. deg F. Baggie (PSI)(PSI) (PSI) (PSI) (PSI) Formula 3558 6025 6358 7450 5083 Z 20 cc

This invention will be explained in more detail below by the way of thefollowing non-limiting examples.

EXAMPLE 1 Yield Comparison

A hydrating patch formulation was prepared as listed in Table 2A Controlpatches 1 and 2 were prepared as well as shown in Table 2A. The sameweight of each patch was weighed out and then mixed with the recommendedamount of water and troweled down between standard 0.38″ keystock with acontrolled width of 2.94″. The resultant length of troweled productrepresents the difference in yield at a defined thickness and width andis reported in Table A below.

TABLE A % Greater Coverage BAR LENGTH of Described Patch Description(in) Invention High Strength Patch Invention 15.50″ n/a CurrentTechnology Patch 11″   41 (Control 1) at 50 cc Current Technology Patch10.25″ 51 (Control 2) at 25 cc

EXAMPLE 2 Hydrating Patch Formulation with Long Shelf Life

A hydrating patch formulation was prepared according to formula G, butwithout hollow borosilicate glass beads added to it. The formulation hasan excellent shelf life and can be used in combination with hollowborosilicate glass beads or any other filler disclosed above.

TABLE B HIGH-STRENGTH CEMENTITIOUS PATCH PREMIX (FORMULA G) AmountAmount Formula G: Components (lbs) (%) Calcium Aluminate Cement 132032.19 (CAC or HAC) Calcium Sulfate Hemi-hydrate 460 11.22 (FST NOGO CKSStucco) Gypsum 150 3.66 Class C cement 230 5.61 Calcium carbonate 105025.60 Walocel (hydroxyethyl 7 0.17 methyl cellulose (HEMC) Mini-U Gel FG(hydrous 14 0.34 magnesium aluminum silicate) Lithium carbonate 7 0.17Citric acid 1 0.02 Polycarboxylate Ether 3.5 0.09 (Melflux 6681) Vinapor9010F (defoamer) 5 0.12 Stabilizer premix 3.5 0.09 Ethylene VinylAcetate co- 750 18.29 polymer (Vinnapas 4021T) Aluminum Oxide (white)100 2.44 Glass beads (K-37 beads) 0 0 TOTAL 4101.50 100.01

What is claimed is:
 1. A hydrating patch composition for patching walls,flooring and ceiling, the composition comprising: Portland cement in theamount from 2% to 10%, Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate in the amount from 2%to 30%, Gypsum in the amount from 0% to 15%, Calcium Aluminate Cement inthe amount from 15% to 40%, Calcium Carbonate in the amount from 0% to40%, a filler in the amount from 1% to 30%, wherein the filler is acombination of hollow borosilicate glass beads and lime; and a binder inthe amount from 10% to 40%, wherein the binder is selected from thegroup consisting of polyacrylates, polyacetates, polyvinyl-acetates, andany combination thereof; wherein all amounts are based on dry weight ofthe composition.
 2. The hydrating patch composition of claim 1, whereincalcium sulfate hemihydrate is calcined synthetic gypsum spray-coatedwith diethylene-triamine-pentaacetic acid (DTPA).
 3. The hydrating patchcomposition of claim 1 wherein the hollow borosilicate glass beads havea crush strength from 250 to 6,000 psi.
 4. The hydrating patchcomposition of claim 1, wherein the hydrating patch compositioncomprises at least one abrasive agent in the amount from 0.05% to 60%and wherein the abrasive agent is selected from the group consisting of:aluminum oxide brown, aluminum oxide white, garnet dust, stardust,copper slag, silica flour and combinations thereof.
 5. The hydratingpatch composition of claim 1, wherein the lime is used in the amountfrom 0.0625% to 10% of the dry weight of hollow borosilicate glassbeads.
 6. The hydrating patch composition of claim 1, wherein thehydrating patch composition further comprises a compound selected fromthe group consisting of: at least one abrasive agent, at least onerheological modifier, at least one set retarder and any compositionthereof.
 7. The hydrating patch composition of claim 1, wherein thehydrating patch composition comprises at least one compound selectedfrom the group consisting of hydroxyethyl methyl cellulose, magnesiumaluminum silicate, diutan gum and any combination thereof.
 8. Thehydrating patch composition of claim 4, wherein the hollow borosilicateglass beads have a crush strength from 250 to 6,000 psi and wherein thehydrating patch composition comprises silica flour and the ratio betweenthe hollow borosilicate glass beads and the silica flour is from 1:1 to3:1.
 9. The hydrating patch composition of claim 1, wherein thehydrating patch composition comprises at least one rheological modifierin the amount from 0.05% to 10% by dry weight of the composition, andwherein the rheological modifier is selected from the group consistingof magnesium aluminum silicate, polycarboxylate, clay and stabilizers.10. The hydrating patch composition of claim 1, wherein the compositionfurther comprises at least one compound selected from the groupconsisting of polycarboxylate ether, citric acid, cream of tartar or acombination thereof.